Got pulled over for my blackout taillights.
06-20-2013, 05:00 PM
#81
Racer
Member Since: Nov 2007
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I actually agree and disagree with some of the things on both sides of this thread. There is truth to both sides but for different reasons.
I've been a LEO in California for 30 years. Here is what is going on at least in CA and I suspect most other places. (My experience may be same or different than other LEO's.)
When I started the job in the early 80's, the blood alcohol content level to be considered DUI was .10. If you arrested a person on a routine traffic stop and he/she was in the range of say a .12 or .13 you would get chastised for making a "chicken-Sh*t arrest by fellow LEO's. You simply used common-sense, experience, objective symptoms, driving and other factors at time of arrest and the test came later at the station, hospital to draw blood...similar to today other than we didn't have portable BAC tests at the time of stop.
If at the time of stop the officer felt that the driver was not well beyond the .10 BAC level many (but not all) used some discretion, such as getting the driver a cab or another person to drive. Hell, we even pulled one end of the distributor wire after we called them a cab so if they doubled back later that night it was disabled. This was based on "attitude," driving, etc. City cops frowned upon the CHP because they routinely arrested people in the .10 range because we felt they "had nothing better to do" than steak-out a bar parking lot and snag borderline drunk drivers at 1:00 AM. They also routinely arrested people with a BAC below .10 and used the vehicle code section for alcohol and/or drugs. Since the arrested person "blew" less than .10 at the time but there was no way to determine drug content other than having a lab do so later, the person was still arrested that night and jailed based upon objective symptoms. (That can still be done today. You might not get convicted later but you still spend the night in jail.) CHP officers see a lot more death and destruction due to accidents than most city cops. They don't routinely chase burglars, handle domestic disputes, robberies, etc. Its mainly all they do, write tickets and take accident reports so you can see why they made those arrests. they are being trained and evaluated on doing that job while the city cops called them chicken-Sh*t.
Then some lawsuits come along where cops were getting sued for letting a borderline person go and the person drove away and crashed into something 1/2 hour later.
So, using a little discretion landed some old-school cops in lawsuits or even getting fired.
Then, M.A.D.D. and other groups came along and gained traction by showing how much havoc there is with drunk driving. Honestly, it was a good thing at the time. Too many people died on the road from DUI.
Then the BAC level changes from .10 to .08. More pressure is put on agencies to arrest drunk drivers.
Discretion starts to go out the window.
The attitude starts changing among cops. The superiors start giving awards to the guys who arrest the most drunk drivers in a year.
M.A.A.D. starts giving awards and medals and ribbons to officers who arrest the most DUI's. Many officers engage in "contests" to see who can arrest the most DUI's and the superiors urge them on through commendations. If you are a 20 something year old cop you do not want to risk the ire of a superior, you want to please them. Also, if you are a 20 or 30 something year old today, you grew up under a different time where you were taught the dangers of DUI at a young age. Their perspective of a drunk driver and my 54 year old perspective is just different.
I'm not interested in getting a DUI award. I know that you can easily screw up a person's life with a .08 DUI arrest and regardless of the studies done, I do not believe everyone is a hazard at .08.
So, yes, they are likely fishing at 1:00 AM. They get paid to fish. Fishing can and often does result in an arrest. Do they get bored? Yes they do. Do they make stops when bored? Yes they do. They are human and they are supposed to find somebody doing something wrong unless they are doing something else more productive. It's not like on TV being action packed all night long. Arresting people is one of the things LEO's get paid to do. There are also times when I stopped somebody driving perfectly but had tail lights out. I was just planning to warn them. Then after contacting them seeing they were completely wasted. But, I don't "hunt" for DUI's as is done today and yes they "hunt" and "fish" for DUI's, burglars and other drivers on the road at 1:00 AM. There is an old saying that during the hours of about 2 AM and 4 or 5 AM there are only 2 kinds of people on the road "crooks and cops." As long as the officer made a legal stop and you aren't a crook, you have nothing to worry about. Yes, he may use anything at his/her disposal in the vehicle code to stop you including license plate lights out, bald tires, tail lights altered, no front plate, etc. He gets paid and trained ordered to do so.
In summary, I do not agree with the continual fishing expeditions and unwritten contests to arrest DUI drivers. These kinds of things generally result in what I call some "chicken-sh*t arrests. But the reason it has evolved to this point is a result of politics, supervision, fear of getting sued and other factors beyond what the street cop thinks should be done. It is no different than all of the "zero tolerance policies" where a teacher can't just take a boy scout knife away from 8 year old Johnnie and tell his parents to tell him not to bring it to school again. Instead some admin writes a rule that Johnnie must be suspended. Don't blame the teacher for the chicken-Sh*t "bust." Blame the courts, politics, the admin and others for taking away the discretion from cops and teachers. Generally, it has nothing to do with a cop on a power trip. Kids racing and crashing in the neighborhood with people demanding that the cops do something at the city council meeting? Guess what?...The chief says go stop the kids...go write tickets and sit at that intersection. Are some of those tickets chicken-Sh*t later? Some are, some not. But a cop is going to do what he is told to legally do. Do I think its B.S. sometimes? Yes. Do you think that some of the stuff that goes on at your job is B.S. sometimes? Unless you are the owner...yes.
Most of what cops do and why they do it is actually what the public, superiors and politicians either want them to do or demand/force them to do. It has nothing to do with power trips (Although yes, there are some that have that issue since police officers are recruited from the human race. Fortunately, they are usually booted from the department and never make the news.)
Some in the LEO community may or may not agree with what I've stated. It's OK. It comes from my personal experience and age.
Sorry for the long-winded post. Jack Webb would have been much more succinct.
I've been a LEO in California for 30 years. Here is what is going on at least in CA and I suspect most other places. (My experience may be same or different than other LEO's.)
When I started the job in the early 80's, the blood alcohol content level to be considered DUI was .10. If you arrested a person on a routine traffic stop and he/she was in the range of say a .12 or .13 you would get chastised for making a "chicken-Sh*t arrest by fellow LEO's. You simply used common-sense, experience, objective symptoms, driving and other factors at time of arrest and the test came later at the station, hospital to draw blood...similar to today other than we didn't have portable BAC tests at the time of stop.
If at the time of stop the officer felt that the driver was not well beyond the .10 BAC level many (but not all) used some discretion, such as getting the driver a cab or another person to drive. Hell, we even pulled one end of the distributor wire after we called them a cab so if they doubled back later that night it was disabled. This was based on "attitude," driving, etc. City cops frowned upon the CHP because they routinely arrested people in the .10 range because we felt they "had nothing better to do" than steak-out a bar parking lot and snag borderline drunk drivers at 1:00 AM. They also routinely arrested people with a BAC below .10 and used the vehicle code section for alcohol and/or drugs. Since the arrested person "blew" less than .10 at the time but there was no way to determine drug content other than having a lab do so later, the person was still arrested that night and jailed based upon objective symptoms. (That can still be done today. You might not get convicted later but you still spend the night in jail.) CHP officers see a lot more death and destruction due to accidents than most city cops. They don't routinely chase burglars, handle domestic disputes, robberies, etc. Its mainly all they do, write tickets and take accident reports so you can see why they made those arrests. they are being trained and evaluated on doing that job while the city cops called them chicken-Sh*t.
Then some lawsuits come along where cops were getting sued for letting a borderline person go and the person drove away and crashed into something 1/2 hour later.
So, using a little discretion landed some old-school cops in lawsuits or even getting fired.
Then, M.A.D.D. and other groups came along and gained traction by showing how much havoc there is with drunk driving. Honestly, it was a good thing at the time. Too many people died on the road from DUI.
Then the BAC level changes from .10 to .08. More pressure is put on agencies to arrest drunk drivers.
Discretion starts to go out the window.
The attitude starts changing among cops. The superiors start giving awards to the guys who arrest the most drunk drivers in a year.
M.A.A.D. starts giving awards and medals and ribbons to officers who arrest the most DUI's. Many officers engage in "contests" to see who can arrest the most DUI's and the superiors urge them on through commendations. If you are a 20 something year old cop you do not want to risk the ire of a superior, you want to please them. Also, if you are a 20 or 30 something year old today, you grew up under a different time where you were taught the dangers of DUI at a young age. Their perspective of a drunk driver and my 54 year old perspective is just different.
I'm not interested in getting a DUI award. I know that you can easily screw up a person's life with a .08 DUI arrest and regardless of the studies done, I do not believe everyone is a hazard at .08.
So, yes, they are likely fishing at 1:00 AM. They get paid to fish. Fishing can and often does result in an arrest. Do they get bored? Yes they do. Do they make stops when bored? Yes they do. They are human and they are supposed to find somebody doing something wrong unless they are doing something else more productive. It's not like on TV being action packed all night long. Arresting people is one of the things LEO's get paid to do. There are also times when I stopped somebody driving perfectly but had tail lights out. I was just planning to warn them. Then after contacting them seeing they were completely wasted. But, I don't "hunt" for DUI's as is done today and yes they "hunt" and "fish" for DUI's, burglars and other drivers on the road at 1:00 AM. There is an old saying that during the hours of about 2 AM and 4 or 5 AM there are only 2 kinds of people on the road "crooks and cops." As long as the officer made a legal stop and you aren't a crook, you have nothing to worry about. Yes, he may use anything at his/her disposal in the vehicle code to stop you including license plate lights out, bald tires, tail lights altered, no front plate, etc. He gets paid and trained ordered to do so.
In summary, I do not agree with the continual fishing expeditions and unwritten contests to arrest DUI drivers. These kinds of things generally result in what I call some "chicken-sh*t arrests. But the reason it has evolved to this point is a result of politics, supervision, fear of getting sued and other factors beyond what the street cop thinks should be done. It is no different than all of the "zero tolerance policies" where a teacher can't just take a boy scout knife away from 8 year old Johnnie and tell his parents to tell him not to bring it to school again. Instead some admin writes a rule that Johnnie must be suspended. Don't blame the teacher for the chicken-Sh*t "bust." Blame the courts, politics, the admin and others for taking away the discretion from cops and teachers. Generally, it has nothing to do with a cop on a power trip. Kids racing and crashing in the neighborhood with people demanding that the cops do something at the city council meeting? Guess what?...The chief says go stop the kids...go write tickets and sit at that intersection. Are some of those tickets chicken-Sh*t later? Some are, some not. But a cop is going to do what he is told to legally do. Do I think its B.S. sometimes? Yes. Do you think that some of the stuff that goes on at your job is B.S. sometimes? Unless you are the owner...yes.
Most of what cops do and why they do it is actually what the public, superiors and politicians either want them to do or demand/force them to do. It has nothing to do with power trips (Although yes, there are some that have that issue since police officers are recruited from the human race. Fortunately, they are usually booted from the department and never make the news.)
Some in the LEO community may or may not agree with what I've stated. It's OK. It comes from my personal experience and age.
Sorry for the long-winded post. Jack Webb would have been much more succinct.
06-20-2013, 05:30 PM
#82
Race Director
As for me, I can't remember the time I have ever been pulled over while driving during daylight hours.
However, I have been pulled over more than once while driving late at night (completely sober and not speeding).
During these late night pull-overs, I have had excuses such as "you looked to be hugging the centerline", or "you were seen as weaving". Obviously, I never received a ticket during these stops, but it was damned obvious the LEO was "fishing" for a DUI. This sort of stop is just uncalled for.
Why can't the police just stop you and say: "I have no reason at all to be pulling you over tonight, but since you are driving at 1:00am, there is a 50/50 chance I can pop you for DUI, and that's why I stopped you".
I can promise you that if your driving from the airport at 1:00am, you have a much much better chance of being pulled over than if your driving at 1:00 in the afternoon.
And ... it just ain't right!
And that never happened years ago at the frequency it does now.
_____________________________
Having those blackout tail lights just gives these police another good reason to 'check you out'.
However, I have been pulled over more than once while driving late at night (completely sober and not speeding).
During these late night pull-overs, I have had excuses such as "you looked to be hugging the centerline", or "you were seen as weaving". Obviously, I never received a ticket during these stops, but it was damned obvious the LEO was "fishing" for a DUI. This sort of stop is just uncalled for.
Why can't the police just stop you and say: "I have no reason at all to be pulling you over tonight, but since you are driving at 1:00am, there is a 50/50 chance I can pop you for DUI, and that's why I stopped you".
I can promise you that if your driving from the airport at 1:00am, you have a much much better chance of being pulled over than if your driving at 1:00 in the afternoon.
And ... it just ain't right!
And that never happened years ago at the frequency it does now.
_____________________________
Having those blackout tail lights just gives these police another good reason to 'check you out'.
06-20-2013, 05:53 PM
#83
Team Owner
Member Since: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 46,111
Received 2,485 Likes
on
1,947 Posts
St. Jude Donor '15
"In honor of jpee"
steveb: good, both sides of argument, nice insights, glad to read it. appreciate your post.
06-20-2013, 05:59 PM
#84
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Dec 2012
Location: Between North and South Pole
Posts: 8,970
Received 463 Likes
on
243 Posts
St. Jude Donor '13-'14-'15-'16-'17-'18-'19-'20-'21-'22-'23
I actually agree and disagree with some of the things on both sides of this thread. There is truth to both sides but for different reasons.
I've been a LEO in California for 30 years. Here is what is going on at least in CA and I suspect most other places. (My experience may be same or different than other LEO's.)
When I started the job in the early 80's, the blood alcohol content level to be considered DUI was .10. If you arrested a person on a routine traffic stop and he/she was in the range of say a .12 or .13 you would get chastised for making a "chicken-Sh*t arrest by fellow LEO's. You simply used common-sense, experience, objective symptoms, driving and other factors at time of arrest and the test came later at the station, hospital to draw blood...similar to today other than we didn't have portable BAC tests at the time of stop.
If at the time of stop the officer felt that the driver was not well beyond the .10 BAC level many (but not all) used some discretion, such as getting the driver a cab or another person to drive. Hell, we even pulled one end of the distributor wire after we called them a cab so if they doubled back later that night it was disabled. This was based on "attitude," driving, etc. City cops frowned upon the CHP because they routinely arrested people in the .10 range because we felt they "had nothing better to do" than steak-out a bar parking lot and snag borderline drunk drivers at 1:00 AM. They also routinely arrested people with a BAC below .10 and used the vehicle code section for alcohol and/or drugs. Since the arrested person "blew" less than .10 at the time but there was no way to determine drug content other than having a lab do so later, the person was still arrested that night and jailed based upon objective symptoms. (That can still be done today. You might not get convicted later but you still spend the night in jail.) CHP officers see a lot more death and destruction due to accidents than most city cops. They don't routinely chase burglars, handle domestic disputes, robberies, etc. Its mainly all they do, write tickets and take accident reports so you can see why they made those arrests. they are being trained and evaluated on doing that job while the city cops called them chicken-Sh*t.
Then some lawsuits come along where cops were getting sued for letting a borderline person go and the person drove away and crashed into something 1/2 hour later.
So, using a little discretion landed some old-school cops in lawsuits or even getting fired.
Then, M.A.D.D. and other groups came along and gained traction by showing how much havoc there is with drunk driving. Honestly, it was a good thing at the time. Too many people died on the road from DUI.
Then the BAC level changes from .10 to .08. More pressure is put on agencies to arrest drunk drivers.
Discretion starts to go out the window.
The attitude starts changing among cops. The superiors start giving awards to the guys who arrest the most drunk drivers in a year.
M.A.A.D. starts giving awards and medals and ribbons to officers who arrest the most DUI's. Many officers engage in "contests" to see who can arrest the most DUI's and the superiors urge them on through commendations. If you are a 20 something year old cop you do not want to risk the ire of a superior, you want to please them. Also, if you are a 20 or 30 something year old today, you grew up under a different time where you were taught the dangers of DUI at a young age. Their perspective of a drunk driver and my 54 year old perspective is just different.
I'm not interested in getting a DUI award. I know that you can easily screw up a person's life with a .08 DUI arrest and regardless of the studies done, I do not believe everyone is a hazard at .08.
So, yes, they are likely fishing at 1:00 AM. They get paid to fish. Fishing can and often does result in an arrest. Do they get bored? Yes they do. Do they make stops when bored? Yes they do. They are human and they are supposed to find somebody doing something wrong unless they are doing something else more productive. It's not like on TV being action packed all night long. Arresting people is one of the things LEO's get paid to do. There are also times when I stopped somebody driving perfectly but had tail lights out. I was just planning to warn them. Then after contacting them seeing they were completely wasted. But, I don't "hunt" for DUI's as is done today and yes they "hunt" and "fish" for DUI's, burglars and other drivers on the road at 1:00 AM. There is an old saying that during the hours of about 2 AM and 4 or 5 AM there are only 2 kinds of people on the road "crooks and cops." As long as the officer made a legal stop and you aren't a crook, you have nothing to worry about. Yes, he may use anything at his/her disposal in the vehicle code to stop you including license plate lights out, bald tires, tail lights altered, no front plate, etc. He gets paid and trained ordered to do so.
In summary, I do not agree with the continual fishing expeditions and unwritten contests to arrest DUI drivers. These kinds of things generally result in what I call some "chicken-sh*t arrests. But the reason it has evolved to this point is a result of politics, supervision, fear of getting sued and other factors beyond what the street cop thinks should be done. It is no different than all of the "zero tolerance policies" where a teacher can't just take a boy scout knife away from 8 year old Johnnie and tell his parents to tell him not to bring it to school again. Instead some admin writes a rule that Johnnie must be suspended. Don't blame the teacher for the chicken-Sh*t "bust." Blame the courts, politics, the admin and others for taking away the discretion from cops and teachers. Generally, it has nothing to do with a cop on a power trip. Kids racing and crashing in the neighborhood with people demanding that the cops do something at the city council meeting? Guess what?...The chief says go stop the kids...go write tickets and sit at that intersection. Are some of those tickets chicken-Sh*t later? Some are, some not. But a cop is going to do what he is told to legally do. Do I think its B.S. sometimes? Yes. Do you think that some of the stuff that goes on at your job is B.S. sometimes? Unless you are the owner...yes.
Most of what cops do and why they do it is actually what the public, superiors and politicians either want them to do or demand/force them to do. It has nothing to do with power trips (Although yes, there are some that have that issue since police officers are recruited from the human race. Fortunately, they are usually booted from the department and never make the news.)
Some in the LEO community may or may not agree with what I've stated. It's OK. It comes from my personal experience and age.
Sorry for the long-winded post. Jack Webb would have been much more succinct.
I've been a LEO in California for 30 years. Here is what is going on at least in CA and I suspect most other places. (My experience may be same or different than other LEO's.)
When I started the job in the early 80's, the blood alcohol content level to be considered DUI was .10. If you arrested a person on a routine traffic stop and he/she was in the range of say a .12 or .13 you would get chastised for making a "chicken-Sh*t arrest by fellow LEO's. You simply used common-sense, experience, objective symptoms, driving and other factors at time of arrest and the test came later at the station, hospital to draw blood...similar to today other than we didn't have portable BAC tests at the time of stop.
If at the time of stop the officer felt that the driver was not well beyond the .10 BAC level many (but not all) used some discretion, such as getting the driver a cab or another person to drive. Hell, we even pulled one end of the distributor wire after we called them a cab so if they doubled back later that night it was disabled. This was based on "attitude," driving, etc. City cops frowned upon the CHP because they routinely arrested people in the .10 range because we felt they "had nothing better to do" than steak-out a bar parking lot and snag borderline drunk drivers at 1:00 AM. They also routinely arrested people with a BAC below .10 and used the vehicle code section for alcohol and/or drugs. Since the arrested person "blew" less than .10 at the time but there was no way to determine drug content other than having a lab do so later, the person was still arrested that night and jailed based upon objective symptoms. (That can still be done today. You might not get convicted later but you still spend the night in jail.) CHP officers see a lot more death and destruction due to accidents than most city cops. They don't routinely chase burglars, handle domestic disputes, robberies, etc. Its mainly all they do, write tickets and take accident reports so you can see why they made those arrests. they are being trained and evaluated on doing that job while the city cops called them chicken-Sh*t.
Then some lawsuits come along where cops were getting sued for letting a borderline person go and the person drove away and crashed into something 1/2 hour later.
So, using a little discretion landed some old-school cops in lawsuits or even getting fired.
Then, M.A.D.D. and other groups came along and gained traction by showing how much havoc there is with drunk driving. Honestly, it was a good thing at the time. Too many people died on the road from DUI.
Then the BAC level changes from .10 to .08. More pressure is put on agencies to arrest drunk drivers.
Discretion starts to go out the window.
The attitude starts changing among cops. The superiors start giving awards to the guys who arrest the most drunk drivers in a year.
M.A.A.D. starts giving awards and medals and ribbons to officers who arrest the most DUI's. Many officers engage in "contests" to see who can arrest the most DUI's and the superiors urge them on through commendations. If you are a 20 something year old cop you do not want to risk the ire of a superior, you want to please them. Also, if you are a 20 or 30 something year old today, you grew up under a different time where you were taught the dangers of DUI at a young age. Their perspective of a drunk driver and my 54 year old perspective is just different.
I'm not interested in getting a DUI award. I know that you can easily screw up a person's life with a .08 DUI arrest and regardless of the studies done, I do not believe everyone is a hazard at .08.
So, yes, they are likely fishing at 1:00 AM. They get paid to fish. Fishing can and often does result in an arrest. Do they get bored? Yes they do. Do they make stops when bored? Yes they do. They are human and they are supposed to find somebody doing something wrong unless they are doing something else more productive. It's not like on TV being action packed all night long. Arresting people is one of the things LEO's get paid to do. There are also times when I stopped somebody driving perfectly but had tail lights out. I was just planning to warn them. Then after contacting them seeing they were completely wasted. But, I don't "hunt" for DUI's as is done today and yes they "hunt" and "fish" for DUI's, burglars and other drivers on the road at 1:00 AM. There is an old saying that during the hours of about 2 AM and 4 or 5 AM there are only 2 kinds of people on the road "crooks and cops." As long as the officer made a legal stop and you aren't a crook, you have nothing to worry about. Yes, he may use anything at his/her disposal in the vehicle code to stop you including license plate lights out, bald tires, tail lights altered, no front plate, etc. He gets paid and trained ordered to do so.
In summary, I do not agree with the continual fishing expeditions and unwritten contests to arrest DUI drivers. These kinds of things generally result in what I call some "chicken-sh*t arrests. But the reason it has evolved to this point is a result of politics, supervision, fear of getting sued and other factors beyond what the street cop thinks should be done. It is no different than all of the "zero tolerance policies" where a teacher can't just take a boy scout knife away from 8 year old Johnnie and tell his parents to tell him not to bring it to school again. Instead some admin writes a rule that Johnnie must be suspended. Don't blame the teacher for the chicken-Sh*t "bust." Blame the courts, politics, the admin and others for taking away the discretion from cops and teachers. Generally, it has nothing to do with a cop on a power trip. Kids racing and crashing in the neighborhood with people demanding that the cops do something at the city council meeting? Guess what?...The chief says go stop the kids...go write tickets and sit at that intersection. Are some of those tickets chicken-Sh*t later? Some are, some not. But a cop is going to do what he is told to legally do. Do I think its B.S. sometimes? Yes. Do you think that some of the stuff that goes on at your job is B.S. sometimes? Unless you are the owner...yes.
Most of what cops do and why they do it is actually what the public, superiors and politicians either want them to do or demand/force them to do. It has nothing to do with power trips (Although yes, there are some that have that issue since police officers are recruited from the human race. Fortunately, they are usually booted from the department and never make the news.)
Some in the LEO community may or may not agree with what I've stated. It's OK. It comes from my personal experience and age.
Sorry for the long-winded post. Jack Webb would have been much more succinct.
Thanks for your service on the left coast - makes me proud to be a Yank!!
06-20-2013, 06:41 PM
#85
steveb...my recent hero on this forum...well said...
i also like the suggestion that folks who have strong feelings "against" cops, make their feelings known when pulled over...should be interesting...lol i kid i kid...
i also like the suggestion that folks who have strong feelings "against" cops, make their feelings known when pulled over...should be interesting...lol i kid i kid...
06-20-2013, 09:44 PM
#88
Pro
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Anaheim California
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I actually agree and disagree with some of the things on both sides of this thread. There is truth to both sides but for different reasons.
I've been a LEO in California for 30 years. Here is what is going on at least in CA and I suspect most other places. (My experience may be same or different than other LEO's.)
When I started the job in the early 80's, the blood alcohol content level to be considered DUI was .10. If you arrested a person on a routine traffic stop and he/she was in the range of say a .12 or .13 you would get chastised for making a "chicken-Sh*t arrest by fellow LEO's. You simply used common-sense, experience, objective symptoms, driving and other factors at time of arrest and the test came later at the station, hospital to draw blood...similar to today other than we didn't have portable BAC tests at the time of stop.
If at the time of stop the officer felt that the driver was not well beyond the .10 BAC level many (but not all) used some discretion, such as getting the driver a cab or another person to drive. Hell, we even pulled one end of the distributor wire after we called them a cab so if they doubled back later that night it was disabled. This was based on "attitude," driving, etc. City cops frowned upon the CHP because they routinely arrested people in the .10 range because we felt they "had nothing better to do" than steak-out a bar parking lot and snag borderline drunk drivers at 1:00 AM. They also routinely arrested people with a BAC below .10 and used the vehicle code section for alcohol and/or drugs. Since the arrested person "blew" less than .10 at the time but there was no way to determine drug content other than having a lab do so later, the person was still arrested that night and jailed based upon objective symptoms. (That can still be done today. You might not get convicted later but you still spend the night in jail.) CHP officers see a lot more death and destruction due to accidents than most city cops. They don't routinely chase burglars, handle domestic disputes, robberies, etc. Its mainly all they do, write tickets and take accident reports so you can see why they made those arrests. they are being trained and evaluated on doing that job while the city cops called them chicken-Sh*t.
Then some lawsuits come along where cops were getting sued for letting a borderline person go and the person drove away and crashed into something 1/2 hour later.
So, using a little discretion landed some old-school cops in lawsuits or even getting fired.
Then, M.A.D.D. and other groups came along and gained traction by showing how much havoc there is with drunk driving. Honestly, it was a good thing at the time. Too many people died on the road from DUI.
Then the BAC level changes from .10 to .08. More pressure is put on agencies to arrest drunk drivers.
Discretion starts to go out the window.
The attitude starts changing among cops. The superiors start giving awards to the guys who arrest the most drunk drivers in a year.
M.A.A.D. starts giving awards and medals and ribbons to officers who arrest the most DUI's. Many officers engage in "contests" to see who can arrest the most DUI's and the superiors urge them on through commendations. If you are a 20 something year old cop you do not want to risk the ire of a superior, you want to please them. Also, if you are a 20 or 30 something year old today, you grew up under a different time where you were taught the dangers of DUI at a young age. Their perspective of a drunk driver and my 54 year old perspective is just different.
I'm not interested in getting a DUI award. I know that you can easily screw up a person's life with a .08 DUI arrest and regardless of the studies done, I do not believe everyone is a hazard at .08.
So, yes, they are likely fishing at 1:00 AM. They get paid to fish. Fishing can and often does result in an arrest. Do they get bored? Yes they do. Do they make stops when bored? Yes they do. They are human and they are supposed to find somebody doing something wrong unless they are doing something else more productive. It's not like on TV being action packed all night long. Arresting people is one of the things LEO's get paid to do. There are also times when I stopped somebody driving perfectly but had tail lights out. I was just planning to warn them. Then after contacting them seeing they were completely wasted. But, I don't "hunt" for DUI's as is done today and yes they "hunt" and "fish" for DUI's, burglars and other drivers on the road at 1:00 AM. There is an old saying that during the hours of about 2 AM and 4 or 5 AM there are only 2 kinds of people on the road "crooks and cops." As long as the officer made a legal stop and you aren't a crook, you have nothing to worry about. Yes, he may use anything at his/her disposal in the vehicle code to stop you including license plate lights out, bald tires, tail lights altered, no front plate, etc. He gets paid and trained ordered to do so.
In summary, I do not agree with the continual fishing expeditions and unwritten contests to arrest DUI drivers. These kinds of things generally result in what I call some "chicken-sh*t arrests. But the reason it has evolved to this point is a result of politics, supervision, fear of getting sued and other factors beyond what the street cop thinks should be done. It is no different than all of the "zero tolerance policies" where a teacher can't just take a boy scout knife away from 8 year old Johnnie and tell his parents to tell him not to bring it to school again. Instead some admin writes a rule that Johnnie must be suspended. Don't blame the teacher for the chicken-Sh*t "bust." Blame the courts, politics, the admin and others for taking away the discretion from cops and teachers. Generally, it has nothing to do with a cop on a power trip. Kids racing and crashing in the neighborhood with people demanding that the cops do something at the city council meeting? Guess what?...The chief says go stop the kids...go write tickets and sit at that intersection. Are some of those tickets chicken-Sh*t later? Some are, some not. But a cop is going to do what he is told to legally do. Do I think its B.S. sometimes? Yes. Do you think that some of the stuff that goes on at your job is B.S. sometimes? Unless you are the owner...yes.
Most of what cops do and why they do it is actually what the public, superiors and politicians either want them to do or demand/force them to do. It has nothing to do with power trips (Although yes, there are some that have that issue since police officers are recruited from the human race. Fortunately, they are usually booted from the department and never make the news.)
Some in the LEO community may or may not agree with what I've stated. It's OK. It comes from my personal experience and age.
Sorry for the long-winded post. Jack Webb would have been much more succinct.
I've been a LEO in California for 30 years. Here is what is going on at least in CA and I suspect most other places. (My experience may be same or different than other LEO's.)
When I started the job in the early 80's, the blood alcohol content level to be considered DUI was .10. If you arrested a person on a routine traffic stop and he/she was in the range of say a .12 or .13 you would get chastised for making a "chicken-Sh*t arrest by fellow LEO's. You simply used common-sense, experience, objective symptoms, driving and other factors at time of arrest and the test came later at the station, hospital to draw blood...similar to today other than we didn't have portable BAC tests at the time of stop.
If at the time of stop the officer felt that the driver was not well beyond the .10 BAC level many (but not all) used some discretion, such as getting the driver a cab or another person to drive. Hell, we even pulled one end of the distributor wire after we called them a cab so if they doubled back later that night it was disabled. This was based on "attitude," driving, etc. City cops frowned upon the CHP because they routinely arrested people in the .10 range because we felt they "had nothing better to do" than steak-out a bar parking lot and snag borderline drunk drivers at 1:00 AM. They also routinely arrested people with a BAC below .10 and used the vehicle code section for alcohol and/or drugs. Since the arrested person "blew" less than .10 at the time but there was no way to determine drug content other than having a lab do so later, the person was still arrested that night and jailed based upon objective symptoms. (That can still be done today. You might not get convicted later but you still spend the night in jail.) CHP officers see a lot more death and destruction due to accidents than most city cops. They don't routinely chase burglars, handle domestic disputes, robberies, etc. Its mainly all they do, write tickets and take accident reports so you can see why they made those arrests. they are being trained and evaluated on doing that job while the city cops called them chicken-Sh*t.
Then some lawsuits come along where cops were getting sued for letting a borderline person go and the person drove away and crashed into something 1/2 hour later.
So, using a little discretion landed some old-school cops in lawsuits or even getting fired.
Then, M.A.D.D. and other groups came along and gained traction by showing how much havoc there is with drunk driving. Honestly, it was a good thing at the time. Too many people died on the road from DUI.
Then the BAC level changes from .10 to .08. More pressure is put on agencies to arrest drunk drivers.
Discretion starts to go out the window.
The attitude starts changing among cops. The superiors start giving awards to the guys who arrest the most drunk drivers in a year.
M.A.A.D. starts giving awards and medals and ribbons to officers who arrest the most DUI's. Many officers engage in "contests" to see who can arrest the most DUI's and the superiors urge them on through commendations. If you are a 20 something year old cop you do not want to risk the ire of a superior, you want to please them. Also, if you are a 20 or 30 something year old today, you grew up under a different time where you were taught the dangers of DUI at a young age. Their perspective of a drunk driver and my 54 year old perspective is just different.
I'm not interested in getting a DUI award. I know that you can easily screw up a person's life with a .08 DUI arrest and regardless of the studies done, I do not believe everyone is a hazard at .08.
So, yes, they are likely fishing at 1:00 AM. They get paid to fish. Fishing can and often does result in an arrest. Do they get bored? Yes they do. Do they make stops when bored? Yes they do. They are human and they are supposed to find somebody doing something wrong unless they are doing something else more productive. It's not like on TV being action packed all night long. Arresting people is one of the things LEO's get paid to do. There are also times when I stopped somebody driving perfectly but had tail lights out. I was just planning to warn them. Then after contacting them seeing they were completely wasted. But, I don't "hunt" for DUI's as is done today and yes they "hunt" and "fish" for DUI's, burglars and other drivers on the road at 1:00 AM. There is an old saying that during the hours of about 2 AM and 4 or 5 AM there are only 2 kinds of people on the road "crooks and cops." As long as the officer made a legal stop and you aren't a crook, you have nothing to worry about. Yes, he may use anything at his/her disposal in the vehicle code to stop you including license plate lights out, bald tires, tail lights altered, no front plate, etc. He gets paid and trained ordered to do so.
In summary, I do not agree with the continual fishing expeditions and unwritten contests to arrest DUI drivers. These kinds of things generally result in what I call some "chicken-sh*t arrests. But the reason it has evolved to this point is a result of politics, supervision, fear of getting sued and other factors beyond what the street cop thinks should be done. It is no different than all of the "zero tolerance policies" where a teacher can't just take a boy scout knife away from 8 year old Johnnie and tell his parents to tell him not to bring it to school again. Instead some admin writes a rule that Johnnie must be suspended. Don't blame the teacher for the chicken-Sh*t "bust." Blame the courts, politics, the admin and others for taking away the discretion from cops and teachers. Generally, it has nothing to do with a cop on a power trip. Kids racing and crashing in the neighborhood with people demanding that the cops do something at the city council meeting? Guess what?...The chief says go stop the kids...go write tickets and sit at that intersection. Are some of those tickets chicken-Sh*t later? Some are, some not. But a cop is going to do what he is told to legally do. Do I think its B.S. sometimes? Yes. Do you think that some of the stuff that goes on at your job is B.S. sometimes? Unless you are the owner...yes.
Most of what cops do and why they do it is actually what the public, superiors and politicians either want them to do or demand/force them to do. It has nothing to do with power trips (Although yes, there are some that have that issue since police officers are recruited from the human race. Fortunately, they are usually booted from the department and never make the news.)
Some in the LEO community may or may not agree with what I've stated. It's OK. It comes from my personal experience and age.
Sorry for the long-winded post. Jack Webb would have been much more succinct.
As for DUI check points, why did we pick one crime to target with a check point? Why not a checkpoint for uninsured drivers, illegal aliens,
FBI most wanted, various warrants etc? Doesn't the 4th amendment protect us from illegal search and seizure which I would argue "fishing" falls under.
Please stop fishing and go kick down the door of the local crack house.
06-20-2013, 11:08 PM
#89
Melting Slicks
Member Since: May 2012
Location: One of the Edema Ruh
Posts: 2,476
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
39 Posts
I agree with most of this post. Regardless of what pressure is put on the officer to ticket the public it is the officer's discretion on who they pull over and for what reason. Why not target people slowing down traffic rather than for speeding? Will we be happy when traffic stops moving completely?
As for DUI check points, why did we pick one crime to target with a check point? Why not a checkpoint for uninsured drivers, illegal aliens,
FBI most wanted, various warrants etc? Doesn't the 4th amendment protect us from illegal search and seizure which I would argue "fishing" falls under.
Please stop fishing and go kick down the door of the local crack house.
As for DUI check points, why did we pick one crime to target with a check point? Why not a checkpoint for uninsured drivers, illegal aliens,
FBI most wanted, various warrants etc? Doesn't the 4th amendment protect us from illegal search and seizure which I would argue "fishing" falls under.
Please stop fishing and go kick down the door of the local crack house.
Check points are called road side safety checks. All types of offenses, including the ones you mentioned, are cited during these stops. You may have noticed postings in the local paper when these check points will be taking place.
Fishing isn't illegal search and seizure. Fishing is just that, looking for other offenses such as you listed, illegal aliens, warrants and even the drug dealer taking crack to that crack house you want officers kicking the door in on
06-20-2013, 11:25 PM
#91
Race Director
Member Since: Mar 2011
Location: SW Florida
Posts: 13,256
Received 3,089 Likes
on
2,078 Posts
2021 C6 of the Year Finalist - Modified
From my previous post:
As for me, I can't remember the time I have ever been pulled over while driving during daylight hours.
However, I have been pulled over more than once while driving late at night (completely sober and not speeding).
During these late night pull-overs, I have had excuses such as "you looked to be hugging the centerline", or "you were seen as weaving". Obviously, I never received a ticket during these stops, but it was damned obvious the LEO was "fishing" for a DUI. This sort of stop is just uncalled for.
Why can't the police just stop you and say: "I have no reason at all to be pulling you over tonight, but since you are driving at 1:00am, there is a 50/50 chance I can pop you for DUI, and that's why I stopped you".
I can promise you that if your driving from the airport at 1:00am, you have a much much better chance of being pulled over than if your driving at 1:00 in the afternoon.
And ... it just ain't right!
And that never happened years ago at the frequency it does now.
Having those blackout tail lights just gives these police another good reason to 'check you out'.
_________________________________
and to SmokinZ51 .... I really don't like your attitude concerning what we have been discussing here, but that's just me, and I am but one person.
However, maybe I missed it from the previous posts, but I have a serious question of you that should qualify for a serious answer ...
Are you currently a Law Enforcement Officer ?
Federal, State, County or City?
Thanks ...
Oh, and since I am asking you of your current employment situation, I guess it is only fair that I tell you mine:
Retired US Army Reserve .. CW-4 (instructor pilot)
Retired Federal Civil Service .. GS-13 (instructor pilot)
_______________________________
And I will say it again ... I DO NOT appreciate some cop stopping me at 1:00am in hopes that he will find some drunk driver behind the wheel! Unfortunately, in my case, all he is doing is wasting MY time (which he is not in a legal position to be doing, unless I am in violation of the law at the time of the stop)!
And don't give me some kind of bogus excuse that I might have been a terrorist, and that he just 'saved the world' by stopping me ... I'm not buying that BS
.
As for me, I can't remember the time I have ever been pulled over while driving during daylight hours.
However, I have been pulled over more than once while driving late at night (completely sober and not speeding).
During these late night pull-overs, I have had excuses such as "you looked to be hugging the centerline", or "you were seen as weaving". Obviously, I never received a ticket during these stops, but it was damned obvious the LEO was "fishing" for a DUI. This sort of stop is just uncalled for.
Why can't the police just stop you and say: "I have no reason at all to be pulling you over tonight, but since you are driving at 1:00am, there is a 50/50 chance I can pop you for DUI, and that's why I stopped you".
I can promise you that if your driving from the airport at 1:00am, you have a much much better chance of being pulled over than if your driving at 1:00 in the afternoon.
And ... it just ain't right!
And that never happened years ago at the frequency it does now.
Having those blackout tail lights just gives these police another good reason to 'check you out'.
_________________________________
and to SmokinZ51 .... I really don't like your attitude concerning what we have been discussing here, but that's just me, and I am but one person.
However, maybe I missed it from the previous posts, but I have a serious question of you that should qualify for a serious answer ...
Are you currently a Law Enforcement Officer ?
Federal, State, County or City?
Thanks ...
Oh, and since I am asking you of your current employment situation, I guess it is only fair that I tell you mine:
Retired US Army Reserve .. CW-4 (instructor pilot)
Retired Federal Civil Service .. GS-13 (instructor pilot)
_______________________________
And I will say it again ... I DO NOT appreciate some cop stopping me at 1:00am in hopes that he will find some drunk driver behind the wheel! Unfortunately, in my case, all he is doing is wasting MY time (which he is not in a legal position to be doing, unless I am in violation of the law at the time of the stop)!
And don't give me some kind of bogus excuse that I might have been a terrorist, and that he just 'saved the world' by stopping me ... I'm not buying that BS
.
Last edited by Turbo6TA; 06-21-2013 at 12:30 AM.
06-20-2013, 11:40 PM
#92
Racer
Member Since: Nov 2007
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with most of this post. Regardless of what pressure is put on the officer to ticket the public it is the officer's discretion on who they pull over and for what reason. Why not target people slowing down traffic rather than for speeding? Will we be happy when traffic stops moving completely?
As for DUI check points, why did we pick one crime to target with a check point? Why not a checkpoint for uninsured drivers, illegal aliens,
FBI most wanted, various warrants etc? Doesn't the 4th amendment protect us from illegal search and seizure which I would argue "fishing" falls under.
Please stop fishing and go kick down the door of the local crack house.
As for DUI check points, why did we pick one crime to target with a check point? Why not a checkpoint for uninsured drivers, illegal aliens,
FBI most wanted, various warrants etc? Doesn't the 4th amendment protect us from illegal search and seizure which I would argue "fishing" falls under.
Please stop fishing and go kick down the door of the local crack house.
1. "Regardless of what pressure is put on the officer to ticket the public it is the officer's discretion on who they pull over and for what reason?"
You are correct. It is the officer's discretion as to whom they pull over. They use that discretion every day. I could write twice as many citations as I do if I wanted. I could also warn more people than I currently write. It's discretion and evolves over time with experience, winning and losing cases in court and a variety of other factors. Especially, the court thing. Believe it or not if you write too many chicken-Sh*t tickets and people go to court and win, some judges are known to either give you a tongue lashing or go to your department and mention that you might need some further training. When I was a rookie I wrote many more cites until an old Sergeant said, "kid that person wasn't a hazard" go get the real violators." Having said that, I will bet if we poll people on this forum you will get varying answers to what is and is not a "hazard." It can be similar on a police department. Some guys have a hard-*n for vehicle traffic violations others for jaywalking, etc. Cops are human. I cannot tell you the number of times I have been directly behind a person at a red light and when it turns green they have floored it. Clueless. People do stupid stuff. Cops also do some stupid stuff. But generally, they try to use good discretion.
2. Why not target people slowing down traffic rather than for speeding?
I am with you 100% on this one. I drive the CA freeway where people get into the #1 lane (what we used to call "fast lane") seemingly "just to slow everybody down." They go 53 in a 55 when everybody else wants to go 60-65. IMO they cause more disruption and accidents because everybody is swerving and changing lanes and tailgating and trying to get around them. My only answer to why they aren't targets is a few things. Generally speaking they aren't usually driving slow enough to be considered impeding the flow of traffic under the law. If they are going 35 maybe but not 53. At 53 they are just irritating a bunch of people and should be over on the right. Also, police departments are generally not well viewed with respect to good PR so they try to avoid controversial stuff. Imagine a bunch of slow "safe and sane" drivers getting tickets for that violation? It would make the news. "Cops have nothing better to do than ticket SLOW drivers. Hi Chief Jones, this is channel 7 haven't you been preaching about people driving to fast and to slow down? What's this about ticketing all these drivers for going 50 on the freeway? Isn't it safer to drive slower? Did you hear the local AARP group is going to show up at the city council meeting next week to complain about this? They would have a field day.
I have stopped a few elderly drivers for just that reason on city streets. But in all honesty I just didn't have the heart to write them a cite.
You are just more likely to cause an accident driving fast vs. driving slow. The only exception is the Autobahn where everybody is driving fast. Our traffic is more congested with people driving at various speeds.
3. Why not a checkpoint for uninsured drivers, illegal aliens,
FBI most wanted, various warrants etc?
As far as DUI checkpoints in CA they are also checking for uninsured drivers and unlicensed drivers. Warrant checks are also done especially if license is expired or unlicensed so that would include your Ten Most Wanted list. By the way, I don't like DUI checkpoints. It's just a personal thing with me but I think money could better spent solving the problem. However, it can be a pretty good deterrent. It's mainly political and the State give cities grants to conduct them. No city is going to turn down the money. I prefer "saturation patrols" with a lot of cops saturating a problem area in an ongoing manner vs. a once every 6 month checkpoint. As far as the illegal alien thing, that’s a political issue and the street-cop has no say in the matter. But street-cops are probably the most conservative people you will ever come across if you get my drift.
4. Doesn't the 4th amendment protect us from illegal search and seizure which I would argue "fishing" falls under.
The key word is "illegal' search and seizure. Whether you like it or not, any violation of the vehicle code is a legal stop. The vehicle code is a bible for a cop. Most felony and misdemeanor arrests are the result of a simple traffic stop. Why? Because most bad guys still have to drive to go from point A to point B. They can’t stay protected in their crack houses forever. They have to drive to transport the drugs, drive to commit the robbery and get away, etc. The street-cop gets paid to catch those bad guys and he/she is applauded when a simple headlight violation turns into a dope arrest or better a child molester sitting in a car near the park who happened to catch the eye of a good cop. I actually saw 2 guys in a car approaching me at night without their headlights on leaving a gas station. I flashed my lights to indicate to them to turn on their lights. As they passed me I saw in the rear view mirror they hadn't turned them on. I figured driver may have been DUI but if not just give them a warning. So I made a U-turn and pulled them over. Car comes back stolen. They were armed. Basically, they had committed a car jacking in Northern CA and committed robberies all the way down to So Cal until they got stopped for not having headlights on. Cops focus a lot on cars. This happened because I was "fishing." I wasn't sitting at the donut shop that night waiting for a call on the radio. I was out "fishing" or "hunting." That is exactly what cops get paid to do. Find the bad guys or violators or whomever, before the crime is committed or catch them before they commit another one. I think you are misinterpreting the term "fishing" It should be called "doing your job when you aren't on a call for service." But "fishing is easier.
In a city, Cops get trained to look 2 blocks down the street for things going on. They are trained to look for things out of the ordinary. When they are not handling a call they are expected do self-initiated things like write tickets, check out potential bad guys that look suspicious in the park at night, etc. That is what most taxpayers want them to do.
I hope I answered all of your questions. There was nothing wrong with your questions and I suspect you are a decent, hard working guy who gets *****d off like everybody else from time to time. I'm just giving you a little of how things work with my personal experience. I could have written this very short and sweet but I think that is the problem with these forums. When the police topics come up. A guy says..."why don't you guys go chase...and leave us good people alone" Then LEO responds here with a sarcastic "Get a life" flippant answer or at least doesn't explain why in detail....and the battle is on. I had some time on my hands the past couple of days so I responded with a lot more detail. Ok, no more long-winded replies from me tonight. Be safe.
06-21-2013, 09:34 AM
#93
Melting Slicks
Member Since: May 2012
Location: One of the Edema Ruh
Posts: 2,476
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
39 Posts
From my previous post:
As for me, I can't remember the time I have ever been pulled over while driving during daylight hours.
However, I have been pulled over more than once while driving late at night (completely sober and not speeding).
During these late night pull-overs, I have had excuses such as "you looked to be hugging the centerline", or "you were seen as weaving". Obviously, I never received a ticket during these stops, but it was damned obvious the LEO was "fishing" for a DUI. This sort of stop is just uncalled for.
Why can't the police just stop you and say: "I have no reason at all to be pulling you over tonight, but since you are driving at 1:00am, there is a 50/50 chance I can pop you for DUI, and that's why I stopped you".
I can promise you that if your driving from the airport at 1:00am, you have a much much better chance of being pulled over than if your driving at 1:00 in the afternoon.
And ... it just ain't right!
And that never happened years ago at the frequency it does now.
Having those blackout tail lights just gives these police another good reason to 'check you out'.
_________________________________
and to SmokinZ51 .... I really don't like your attitude concerning what we have been discussing here, but that's just me, and I am but one person.
However, maybe I missed it from the previous posts, but I have a serious question of you that should qualify for a serious answer ...
Are you currently a Law Enforcement Officer ?
Federal, State, County or City?
Thanks ...
Oh, and since I am asking you of your current employment situation, I guess it is only fair that I tell you mine:
Retired US Army Reserve .. CW-4 (instructor pilot)
Retired Federal Civil Service .. GS-13 (instructor pilot)
_______________________________
And I will say it again ... I DO NOT appreciate some cop stopping me at 1:00am in hopes that he will find some drunk driver behind the wheel! Unfortunately, in my case, all he is doing is wasting MY time (which he is not in a legal position to be doing, unless I am in violation of the law at the time of the stop)!
And don't give me some kind of bogus excuse that I might have been a terrorist, and that he just 'saved the world' by stopping me ... I'm not buying that BS
.
As for me, I can't remember the time I have ever been pulled over while driving during daylight hours.
However, I have been pulled over more than once while driving late at night (completely sober and not speeding).
During these late night pull-overs, I have had excuses such as "you looked to be hugging the centerline", or "you were seen as weaving". Obviously, I never received a ticket during these stops, but it was damned obvious the LEO was "fishing" for a DUI. This sort of stop is just uncalled for.
Why can't the police just stop you and say: "I have no reason at all to be pulling you over tonight, but since you are driving at 1:00am, there is a 50/50 chance I can pop you for DUI, and that's why I stopped you".
I can promise you that if your driving from the airport at 1:00am, you have a much much better chance of being pulled over than if your driving at 1:00 in the afternoon.
And ... it just ain't right!
And that never happened years ago at the frequency it does now.
Having those blackout tail lights just gives these police another good reason to 'check you out'.
_________________________________
and to SmokinZ51 .... I really don't like your attitude concerning what we have been discussing here, but that's just me, and I am but one person.
However, maybe I missed it from the previous posts, but I have a serious question of you that should qualify for a serious answer ...
Are you currently a Law Enforcement Officer ?
Federal, State, County or City?
Thanks ...
Oh, and since I am asking you of your current employment situation, I guess it is only fair that I tell you mine:
Retired US Army Reserve .. CW-4 (instructor pilot)
Retired Federal Civil Service .. GS-13 (instructor pilot)
_______________________________
And I will say it again ... I DO NOT appreciate some cop stopping me at 1:00am in hopes that he will find some drunk driver behind the wheel! Unfortunately, in my case, all he is doing is wasting MY time (which he is not in a legal position to be doing, unless I am in violation of the law at the time of the stop)!
And don't give me some kind of bogus excuse that I might have been a terrorist, and that he just 'saved the world' by stopping me ... I'm not buying that BS
.
It sucks you have been pulled over multiple times late at night for not violating any laws. It's inconvenient for you and if you're not doing anything illegal it's BS. A few on here are complaining about being stopped for breaking the law whether it's speeding, blacked out tail lights (not you Wayback I know you weren't complaining about it) no front plate or whatever. If you're going to do something wrong you can't complain about being stopped for it if the LEO is out "fishing".
Speeding is speeding and that's why it's called a limit. You go over it it's cause to stop you. Do I think LEO's should stop people for doing 5 over? No, absolutely not. I do think they should be able to and simple stops like that lead to bigger things like it or not. I have been stopped for going 67 in a 65. The LEO was "fishing". Did I care? Nope, I was on my way after he checked me out. Did I think it was BS he stopped me for that? Yes, but he had every right to. I don't run a front plate and if I'm stopped and ticketed for it that's on me not the LEO that "should be out catching real criminals".
Last edited by Kvothe; 06-21-2013 at 09:37 AM.
06-21-2013, 10:37 AM
#95
Racer
06-21-2013, 10:48 AM
#96
At first they(2 cops) said they where pulling me over for the window tint, Then they went right to the "finger test" and i passed(didnt even have a sip of alcohol in me), They said afterwards that "youre free to go", They even admitted that they just wanted to see if i was drinking and driving since it was next to a strip of bars at 1am on a Friday night.
06-21-2013, 10:54 AM
#97
Team Owner
Member Since: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 46,111
Received 2,485 Likes
on
1,947 Posts
St. Jude Donor '15
"In honor of jpee"
IMO, ano0ther great post by steveb. A guy who takes the time to explain not just one side, but the other as well. I can respect that even if I don't agree w. all of it. It is nonetheless an explanation and far more complete than many others.
06-21-2013, 12:48 PM
#99
Drifting
Hi Steve,
First off let me add my hats off to you and thanks, for sharing your thoughts here in the most eloquent manner, and in a way that makes us all think "Boy, if all LEO's were that smart and considerate of the human factor, our roads would be better off."
Bottom line is human beings are inconsistent, and that is true in every profession. You're a great LEO because you're a great human being. So thank you for choosing that career and raising the bar within.
Now for the sake of debating, (and beating a dead horse) there is just one point that I think is still not regarded with as much scrutiny as it should, what I refer to as "The Great American Road Block" (I moved to the US at the age of 30 and had never experienced this phenomenon before) : Slow movers blocking the left lane.
Europeans Highways are every bit as much if not more congested than US ones, considering the fact that most of them are 2 or 3 lanes max. as opposed to 3, 4, or more, yet you will never see ANY vehicle appropriating itself the left lane, in total disregard of other fellow motorists wanting to go past them.
When you hypothetically suggest the below reaction from a TV station:
I would contend that it might be, but not in the left / passing / fast / #1 lane.
And I'm sure you know statistics are here to prove it, when you investigate crashes root causes....
With that said I understand most of this starts with education, and the way one acquires a drivers license.
Thanks again for your great service!
First off let me add my hats off to you and thanks, for sharing your thoughts here in the most eloquent manner, and in a way that makes us all think "Boy, if all LEO's were that smart and considerate of the human factor, our roads would be better off."
Bottom line is human beings are inconsistent, and that is true in every profession. You're a great LEO because you're a great human being. So thank you for choosing that career and raising the bar within.
Now for the sake of debating, (and beating a dead horse) there is just one point that I think is still not regarded with as much scrutiny as it should, what I refer to as "The Great American Road Block" (I moved to the US at the age of 30 and had never experienced this phenomenon before) : Slow movers blocking the left lane.
Europeans Highways are every bit as much if not more congested than US ones, considering the fact that most of them are 2 or 3 lanes max. as opposed to 3, 4, or more, yet you will never see ANY vehicle appropriating itself the left lane, in total disregard of other fellow motorists wanting to go past them.
When you hypothetically suggest the below reaction from a TV station:
And I'm sure you know statistics are here to prove it, when you investigate crashes root causes....
With that said I understand most of this starts with education, and the way one acquires a drivers license.
Thanks again for your great service!
Last edited by GuyFromLeMans; 06-21-2013 at 12:55 PM.
06-21-2013, 01:21 PM
#100
Team Owner
Member Since: Jun 2005
Location: Northern, VA
Posts: 46,111
Received 2,485 Likes
on
1,947 Posts
St. Jude Donor '15
"In honor of jpee"
Hi Steve,
First off let me add my hats off to you and thanks, for sharing your thoughts here in the most eloquent manner, and in a way that makes us all think "Boy, if all LEO's were that smart and considerate of the human factor, our roads would be better off."
Bottom line is human beings are inconsistent, and that is true in every profession. You're a great LEO because you're a great human being. So thank you for choosing that career and raising the bar within.
Now for the sake of debating, (and beating a dead horse) there is just one point that I think is still not regarded with as much scrutiny as it should, what I refer to as "The Great American Road Block" (I moved to the US at the age of 30 and had never experienced this phenomenon before) : Slow movers blocking the left lane.
Europeans Highways are every bit as much if not more congested than US ones, considering the fact that most of them are 2 or 3 lanes max. as opposed to 3, 4, or more, yet you will never see ANY vehicle appropriating itself the left lane, in total disregard of other fellow motorists wanting to go past them.
When you hypothetically suggest the below reaction from a TV station:
I would contend that it might be, but not in the left / passing / fast / #1 lane.
And I'm sure you know statistics are here to prove it, when you investigate crashes root causes....
With that said I understand most of this starts with education, and the way one acquires a drivers license.
Thanks again for your great service!
First off let me add my hats off to you and thanks, for sharing your thoughts here in the most eloquent manner, and in a way that makes us all think "Boy, if all LEO's were that smart and considerate of the human factor, our roads would be better off."
Bottom line is human beings are inconsistent, and that is true in every profession. You're a great LEO because you're a great human being. So thank you for choosing that career and raising the bar within.
Now for the sake of debating, (and beating a dead horse) there is just one point that I think is still not regarded with as much scrutiny as it should, what I refer to as "The Great American Road Block" (I moved to the US at the age of 30 and had never experienced this phenomenon before) : Slow movers blocking the left lane.
Europeans Highways are every bit as much if not more congested than US ones, considering the fact that most of them are 2 or 3 lanes max. as opposed to 3, 4, or more, yet you will never see ANY vehicle appropriating itself the left lane, in total disregard of other fellow motorists wanting to go past them.
When you hypothetically suggest the below reaction from a TV station:
I would contend that it might be, but not in the left / passing / fast / #1 lane.
And I'm sure you know statistics are here to prove it, when you investigate crashes root causes....
With that said I understand most of this starts with education, and the way one acquires a drivers license.
Thanks again for your great service!
That means there is no left/#1 lane for 75 in 55 mph speed limited highway, or 95 in a 55, or 150 in a 55. Most drivers in this country also have never seen/done 100+ mph in their cars, even if the cars are capable of it, or look like they are (most cars---that's 51% can probably reach 101 mph).
In a sense then, the "passing lane" becomes a lane for something like non-trucks to pass trucks doing 40 up a hill. That's one take on it, but the point is public outcry for what steve wrote is probably on the side of 53 mph in a 55 zone, even IF it is holding up traffic. And that is because people in this country know that most (but certainly not all) drivers can't safely do 100+ mph in any car, even their best Corvette, P-car or F-car. They just don't know how to drive that well.